YESTERDAY I was sitting out on our curb, drinking a beer, contemplating this cool looking helicopter seed that had fallen in front of me. It was all pink and gold and thought to myself "Maybe this could be a good image to use in a Black Moth Super Rainbow poster." Then I decided not to and crumpled it up. TRUE STORY!
Yeah, if certain few had their way there'd be no such thing as fair use. "Fair use" IS a specific legal term though (http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html), but just as the govt admits on that page "The distinction between 'fair use' and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined." But I refer to fair use here not as a matter of legal infringement but just as a matter of our own creative goals as poster artists are concerned. In this case I believe Joe has done nothing to advance the image or idea of Mick Jagger. He's slapped him on a poster without recontextualizing him in some way. Sorry, is "recontextualizing" is even a word? Screw it. All I'm saying is, make it yours.
I kind of think you all are missing the point here. I think it's about the basic idea of fair use and the concept of using an existing image while ADVANCING that image. This poster doesn't advance this image of Jagger at all. It's just Jagger. A lizard body, a white trickle down his mouth, syringes shooting out of his eyes, anything that might have made a statement or a story or "advanced" the image of Mick beyond just a picture of him would be more appropriate, and maybe interesting. This poster does no kind of advancement and I think that's the problem.